3 reasons why a Solo Disney+ show would be better than another movie

Right after Solo: A Star Wars Story debuted in theaters, there was still a possibility for at least two more sequels starring Alden Ehrenreich as Han Solo, along with a standalone film starring Donald Glover as Lando Calrissian. Though the franchise made some missteps at the box office, Lucasfilm's had better luck with Star Wars TV shows on Disney+. The Mandalorian has been a smash hit with fans and critics, snagging 15 Emmy nominations for its first season.

Amid all the recent rumors about a Han Solo TV series, or a Darth Maul TV series, or a Lando Calrissian TV series, now is the time to say yes to all of it. A Solo Disney+ series is vastly preferable to Solo 2. Here's 3 reasons why.

If Solo: A Star Wars Story had come out in 2015, before The Force Awakens, there is a good chance people would have liked it more. As Germain Lussier pointed out on io9 recently, Solo feels an awful lot like The Force Awakens.

Since we'd already had our nostalgia-fueled romp with The Force Awakens, Solo felt stale, like more of the same. This may have had more to do with poor timing than storytelling choices. If Solo was an ongoing Disney+ TV show in the mold of The Mandalorian, everyone would have liked it. Basically, it either came out too early or too late, depending on how you look it.

By that logic, a TV series that picks up where the movie left off could be amazing. Think about it. Doesn't Solo feel like the pilot episode for a late '90s sci-fi show like Firefly? Shouldn't this have always been a TV show? I think the answer is yes.

3. A Solo TV show could resolve loose threads

Try to imagine a Mandalorian movie. Yep. It would suck. Part of the reason we all like The Mandalorian is that the open-ended nature of the show means there's less at stake in terms of fulfilling our big Star Wars expectations. For whatever reason, the mere idea of a Star Wars movie comes with so much pressure, that it's impossible for the movies to simply be about one or two things.

This is part of why The Rise of Skywalker is so flawed, but also part of why some people can't get over the space casino in The Last Jedi. Solo has this problem, too — it tried to touch on all of Star Wars. Even when you thought there wouldn't be a lightsaber or any mention of the Force, Darth Maul shows up.

I stand by my 2018 statement that Solo is one of the sexier and more adult Star Wars movies in the franchise. Even so, there's simply too much stuff in the movie. The revelation about Enfys Nest's gang being part of the early Rebellion was awesome. The slightly phoned-in idea of Maul as a crime boss was weird, but could be cool if it were explored more. Emilia Clarke was pretty good as Qi'ra, and seeing what she did next would have been pretty cool. There's a lot there, and even if there had been a few Solo sequels, not all of that stuff could have been covered.

2. The setting of Solo could have an interesting impact on existing Star Wars canon

Solo ended with Han and Chewbacca on their way to work for Jabba the Hutt, having won the Millenium Falcon in a game of Sabaac from Lando. That said, we're not really sure how much time passes between Han and Chewie's confrontation with Beckett and the final card game with Lando. In other words, a Solo series could explore that brief time between, and what happens right after. We're told that the bulk of Solo takes place about 10 years before A New Hope (10 BBY). That means Han and Chewie basically worked for Jabba the Hutt for a full decade before dumping some spice and cutting ties with the gangster.

Or did they? At the end of Solo, Han says they're headed to Tatooine, but we don't actually know what happened next. We also know that Han and Lando probably crossed paths at least a few more times in between Solo and The Empire Strikes Back, and exploring how and why any of that happens could be very, very interesting.

Finally, because all of this happens before Rebels and A New Hope, the way in which Enfys Nest's efforts lead to a more formal Rebellion could be depicted, even if it was from Han and Chewie watching on the sidelines.

1. The show wouldn't need to be about only Han

The most important reason why a Solo Disney+ show could be great is that the show doesn't need to lean as heavily on Han Solo. Sure, he might be the lead in the same way that Nathan Fillion was the lead of Firefly. But, that doesn't mean the series needs to be a Han show. In fact, you don't even need to call it Solo.

Why not call it Scoundrels? Or Smugglers? Or, if you want to be really daring, Nerf Herders. (Actually, some people might take issue with that if we never actually see any nerfs being herded.)

The point is, having a Disney+ Star Wars show that directly acts as a sequel to Solo means we get a Han show, a Lando show, a Darth Maul show, an Enfys Nest show, and Qi'ra show all at the same time. If you think hard about the characters and situations presented in Solo, it has all the ingredients for an open-ended action-adventure series. Contrast that with the limited possible scope of an Obi-Wan show (seriously, there's only so much he can do) it's actually sort of amazing that we haven't already heard about a show like this.

A Disney+ show that acts as a sequel to Solo is not only the Star Wars series fans deserve, if they search their feelings, they'll realize it's the one they want, too.

We may receive a portion of sales from products purchased from this article, which was written by our Editorial team.